Description
This locally led commitment has been submitted to the Open Gov Challenge as part of Spain’s 2025-2029 national action plan, under the “Participation and Civic Space” category (Milestone 10.4.11).
Explore the full action plan: https://www.opengovpartnership.org/documents/spain-action-plan-2025-2029
Background
Spain is one of five OECD countries, along with Canada, Ireland, Iceland and Norway, that have not adopted a strategic plan to reduce the risks of corruption with a coherent and comprehensive integrity system, which is one of the organisation’s key recommendations. The OECD recommends the development of a public integrity strategy based on three pillars:
- System: having a system in place to reduce opportunities for corrupt behaviour.
- Culture: Changing a culture to make corruption socially unacceptable.
- Accountability: Making people responsible for their actions.
All of the above makes it advisable to establish preventive and corrective tools to address breaches of integrity and possible acts of corruption.
It is therefore necessary to establish regulatory frameworks, such as integrity maps obtained from a detailed and specific risk assessment, and their effective implementation accompanied by the measurement of the results achieved. This risk assessment and the development of regulatory integrity frameworks must be carried out in conjunction with external anti-fraud control authorities to ensure the transparency of the process.
What is the problem/need that the initiative aims to resolve?
The absence of integrity frameworks in public administrations that anticipate and correct conduct contrary to the principles of public integrity. The absence of integrity seals that guarantee that the certified entity has its own integrity map, ensuring that a rigorous self-assessment of its potential risks has been carried out, that a relevant risk map has been drawn up, and that an integrity plan has been developed.
Brief description
Development of integrity frameworks in public administrations.
Accreditation of those administrative units that develop their respective integrity frameworks. Integrity frameworks are developed in four basic phases:
- A self-assessment of the situation.
- A specific risk assessment by activity.
- An integrity plan covering the identified risks.
- An external assessment.
It is proposed that the monitoring, verification and final assessment be carried out by external anti-fraud authorities or similar bodies.
Objectives
- Development of integrity frameworks by public administrations.
- Conducting self-assessments by public administrations in the area of integrity.
- Detection and mapping of risks that public administrations may face based on their powers and their own management.
- Draw up the corresponding Integrity Plan.
- Certify that public administrations comply with the above steps, creating, where appropriate, a common distinction for all public administrations. Such accreditation may, where appropriate, be carried out by the independent authorities referred to in Law 2/2023 of 20 February, and, where appropriate, either by the Autonomous Community itself or by the one created by the General State Administration.
How does the initiative contribute to solving the problem or meeting the need?
This would comply with the OECD recommendation in this regard, addressing a need that has not yet been addressed in our country and that must be initiated gradually, all with the aim of creating a culture of public integrity, just as a culture of occupational risk prevention has been created with the approval of Prevention Plans, or a culture of equality with the approval of Equality Plans.
Relevance to open government values
We understand that it has MEDIUM relevance, insofar as integrity and accountability is one of the pillars of the Plan and probably one of the least developed in previous plans, especially in comparison with other pillars such as transparency.